graduation rates. "washington journal" is next. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. >> mr. president, 19 months ago a terrible thing happened in benghazi. for brave americans were murdered, and the issue has never been resolved. as each of the 19 months has an ensued the issue of how this heinous crime was committed continues. the center for south carolina and i, a senator from new hampshire, have vowed we will never give up on this issue until the truth is known in the

people who perpetrated are brought to justice. host: the latest round of charges from senator john mccain and other leading republicans on the attack in benghazi that resulted in the death of a u.s. ambassador and three other americans. now, nearly two years later, this issue isn't going away on capitol hill, in part because of the newly released e-mail. also, a congressional hearing yesterday in washington. good morning, it is friday, may the second ver2. mainly, we want to know if the investigation is important to you. meanwhile, at the white house the president will be meeting with the german chancellor angela merkel. his issues likely to come up in

a news conference with reporters. the president is hosting the german chancellor for a working lunch and an oval office meeting. those nsa phone taps the situation in ukraine are also subject to dominate the conversation. we want to begin with the issue of benghazi because it has come front and center yet again. this morning inside the "the wall street journal" --

meanwhile, "the hill" newspaper has an item. one of the e-mails details national security advisor -- senator lindsey graham of south carolina calls roads e-mail a smoking gun that proves the white house tried to spin the facts at of the presidential election. that e-mail just part of the story. course hearing by house republicans and the house oversight committee. overseeing what was happening in north africa and the middle east. this is part of the opening statement. the chairman of that committee

california republican darrell issa. >> some of the documents which were brought to light only days ago through a four-year request by an organization known as judicial watch, show a direct white house role outside, i am going to repeat this, the documents from judicial watch which were pursuant to our request more than a year and half ago, show a direct white house role outside of talking points prepared by the intelligence community. the white house produced the talking points that ambassador rice used, not intelligence community. in pushing the false narrative that youtube video was responsible for the deaths of for brave americans. his sister and perhaps criminal that these documents were hidden

by the obama administration from congress and the public alike particularly after secretary kerry pledged cooperation and the president himself told the american people in november of 2012 that every bit of information we have on benghazi has been provided. this committee's job has been to get to the facts and the truth. i, for one, will continue to chip away at this until we get the whole truth. host: congressman darrell issa yesterday. also the speaker of the house on john kerry. the speaker calls on john kerry to testify on benghazi. john boehner says, someone needs to answer why this administration hid these documents until you american people what else is being concealed.

the house used its subpoena power to obtain documents, including e-mails last year, but these e-mails did not show up until now after court ordered their release to and outside watchdog group. we want to get your calls and comments and the question of whether or not you think this investigation is important. jean is joining us from the democrats line from arizona. caller: in the big picture, i think the trend put all this on hillary clinton. god bless one's a died in benghazi, but the republicans have nothing else to bring to the table. i think it is that important. god bless all the active-duty personnel.

god bless america. host: we want to hear from bill joining us from texas. caller: good morning to all the listeners. i want to state that this is a cover upon behalf of hillary clinton and the department of justice's failure to follow through on their investigation. thank you. host: carol makes this point. you can send in your tweet. our next call is jack, joining us this morning from new york. on the independent line. caller: i think it is very

important that the american individuals were murdered on the national press doesn't much want to cover. the networks seem to be given surpassed. i think in honor of those people they should be covered and not covered up. host: thank you for your call. the benghazi story is on the websites, but not a hard copy of the washington edition of both of those newspapers. roll call does have the headline quoting benghazi, benghazi, benghazi, and then asking the question, why aren't we talking about something else? we will more from leader pelosi in just a moment. caller: is not important to me

not the fact that we lost americans, but senator mccain is talking about he won't rest until these people are captured. he seems to forget how long it took us to capture bin laden. the point i want to make is, i don't recall senator mccain or senator graham or congressman issa insisting that we have hearings on the loss of several thousand americans in iraq, or investigating what happened and who did it during the bush and cheney administration where it is clear they lied to us about going into iraq. and understand how we lost 3000 and no one seems to be concerned about those individuals. host: that you are much for the call.

-- thank you very much for the call. meanwhile, the president hosts chancellor angela merkel for a morning session in the oval office followed by a news briefing with reporters. he leads the questions from german and american reporters, followed by a luncheon at the white house.

live coverage here on c-span also on c-span radio getting underway at 11:40 eastern time. our next call is don from fairborn ohio on the republican line. caller: it has been avenged and president obama learned his lesson on writing on it. he is not bragging on at this time. the muslim brotherhood were in cairo. this is not hocus-pocus.

revelation 19:11. they brought down the muslim brotherhood. they will be executed for killing our fellow americans. our fellow americans rest with jesus in heaven above. host: thanks for the call. this morning, tom coburn -- we sat down with them for c-span's q&a program. it is available on a website and the oklahoma republican calling it porky's 2 - the earmark ers strike back. next is mavis joining us from fort lauderdale, florida on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning.

i am doing well. at this point, i call it a which hunt. mr. issa has spent millions of our tax dollars on this. i mean, it is what it is now. why aren't we investigating mr. bush and cheney for thousands of americans who have died in iraq and iran. if you want to get a bottom of something, let's get to the bottom of why we were taken to war in iraq and afghanistan? host: mavis thank you very much for the call. meanwhile, this morning's cnn.com with this question --

few issues reveal the hyper person policies and politics of washington more than the ongoing debate over an issue now known simply as benghazi. in responding to this yesterday is a houston chronicle eater former speaker, nancy pelosi. >> i will say this again diversion, subterfuge. why aren't we talking about something else? what are no of what i read in the press about those e-mails were very consistent what was put out

there. i don't see there's anything new there. host: the comments of the democratic leader, nancy pelosi, yesterday. caller: good morning. i spent nearly eight years in the marine corps. one of those years i served in vietnam. these republicans make it hard for me to be proud to be an american. this is one of the most asinine things i've ever seen in my life. we went to serve. the ambassador went to serve. we are hated all over the world. people are trying to kill us as americans all over the world. you want an investigation? investigate why we are so hated. what is it that we are doing to people throughout the world that causes them to hate us so much? is nothing to do with being a

muslim. that muslims a live in this country and love america. the problem is the politics of it all. it is just power. all it takes is power. the republicans up there, all they want is power. they don't want to do anything for the poor person, they just want the power, the strength, to be in charge. right now people are saying, investigate why we were in iraq. investigate why the embassy in tanzania was blown up. there's always someone after an american each and every day, especially those on embassy duties. host: d says i call it a distraction so you won't notice a trade deal they want to push through to send more of your jobs overseas. a lot of comment on her facebook page. let me share just a few of them.

our next caller is michael joining us from new jersey, the

republican line. caller: i just have a comment. it seems that democrats and republicans are from two different countries. i would like to say we are from the same country and i wish we would all want the same thing, which is the truth, spoken from our government. i don't understand why some people seem to think it is a political issue, when maybe it possibly is. joey really wanted truthful answer from a government that seems to lie every time they want an answer to be given among us who are the same, republican or democrat. we just want to. people who accept lies and then tell us we're supposed to accept lies they seem to be coming from a democratic side. at understand why they don't want the truth is much of the rest of us do. independent, democrat, republican. this is america. we are americans. we all need to stick together. what we need, another 9/11 to

make a stick together? i think we need to get together now and to all want the same thing for our country and our children. host: michael, thanks for the call. susan has this point. meanwhile, lindsey graham in "the hill" newspaper.

here is a portion of a question during the hearings. >> sorry for your loss and your sacrifice. we should have done more whether it was in preparation prior to or execution at the time. even if we simply just burned gas and airplanes moving people. we have to have the american people that provide us with their sons and daughters brothers and sisters, moms and dads, and continue to fill uniforms and to fill the civilian positions or so key and so brave as well out there in harms way. we have to be sure we rebuild

the trust. this is bob lovell talking to now. we have to rebuild the trust. we need to say to them, we should have done more. we owe to the memory of those four people that are fallen and to those that were hurt and wounded. >> could we have done more? host: former retired british general bob lovell. this is the story this morning from "usa today."

reyes joining us from clinton, pennsylvania, on the independent line. caller: good morning. i think we're are missing a huge point here. it is important to me because hillary clinton is preparing to declare her intention to run for president. i would like to know when she was notified. she was ahead of the state department. when was she notified, what was she doing and what did she do about it. she should be held accountable on those three questions until she answers what she was doing.

she is the head of the state department. you need to tell me one even notified? if you were, there has to be a plan. that is what has to be gotten to the bottom of their view on her and in a leadership position? when she doesn't handle what is going on in her own state department? how can you leave people out there for five or six hours in a running gun battle. this is absolutely -- if the bush administration had done it it would be a whole different story. i wish you would conduct a program summaries people to find out the answers to some of those questions. host: the question we're are asking if you're just tuning in or listening on c-span radio the benghazi investigation, is it important to you?

from our facebook page, more of your comments. kevin drum has a piece that he posted overnight from mother jones magazine.

exes bonnie joining us from middletown, new jersey. good morning. caller: is nothing more than smoke screens, distractions and distractions to how miserable your life really is. it is the same thing with darrell issa, the car thief spent so much time on trying to repeal the health care act. the situation in libya was a tinderbox. those brave people who volunteer to work for our safety and our security understood this. it is not the same thing as i'm not a crook. it is not the same thing as

aluminum tubes and mushroom clouds. this is always a risk area when people go into a country to try to make peace or solve problems in a dysfunctional government and people are rebelling. yes, that film did have something do with it and there was coverage of it. it was two weeks in the new york times and the washington post that showed that it was already a very dangerous situation and this horrific, and moronic film that came out that degraded their god and their religion was all it took for them -- from situation to explode. i think it is time for us to move on and stop with the distractions and all of the division because that is what this party always does. they point the finger at the women, fear the enemy. upon the finger at the minority, they're are the enemy.

they want to divide us. we have to start thinking for ourselves and realize that if we don't come together as a nation and fight for the rights we deserve, are of course, not the voice of money, we are never going to get our situation any better. this country is never going to become whole. host: bonnie, thank you very much, from new jersey. some of the headlines on this friday morning. the president is meeting with the german president. ukraine is likely to be part of the conversations morning. headline from the "financial times." inside "the new york times," often a photo is enough to tell a story. you can see a scene outside deal

meant to school in south korea to pay tribute to those who died when the ferry went down late last month. tim from hollister, missouri republican line. caller: my question is, our embassies are an extension of american soil. why is it that they just say it is not a big deal, to send anyone to protect our interest. it happened in washington, do you think that hillary clinton would say does it matter now? i really don't think so. our administration doesn't seem to do that for some reason. thank you very much. host: from the front page of the "usa today."

back to the story on benghazi. the full testimony is available online. james from munford, tennessee. caller: good morning, sir. i guess i'm a bit older than most people calling in, but nobody died in the watergate episode, and he was lying, and he was forced out. he decided he better leave. you know what? during the hearings, do you know who asked the question, what did you know and when did you know

what? that was a republican. it seems of their having these hearings that both parties should be trying to get to the bottom line truth of the lies, but it seems like the democrats are defense lawyers defending this administration. this administration has lied to us about benghazi. by the way, for people did get killed there. it lied to us about fast and furious and the obamacare. they're just a bunch of lies. we need to get to the bottom of this thing. host: good morning. another viewer sang thing ghazi is all politics push for the gop to smear hillary clinton before possible presidential campaign. the secretary of state john

kerry is in sudan. again, he's wanting a fando warning about famine and genocide. on his asian tour, the president would have to reassure japan that he could count on america. as vladimir putin writes the economist disrupts ukraine come europeans fret about whether they are next. each situation is different, but the echo chamber of global politics reinforce each other. together, these retreats by a nagging suspicion among friends and foes that on a big day america simply might not turn up. this is the cover story of "the

economist here:t." caller: i have a wholly different perspective here. i want to know how it did mitt romney notice emphatically and so well? prior to september 11, he spent two weeks in israel fund-raising to become president and stayed with benjamin netanyahu. who told him there that there's going to be a terrorist attack? the second question i have is the republicans are solely focused on process. they're focused on who actually committed crimes, who killed these people. when his investigation to actually find out to who committed the crimes and bring them to justice.

this is the first time he had the military murder were no one cares about who did it, but they're just concerned with process. i have another question. for it to be such a hostile area, where did this high definition protection style video come out to look like a propaganda film from the beginning. who shot that? how did they get into that hostile territory echo? this is high -def video equipment. i believe this was a september surprise that went awry. they probably thought this would put romney in as president and it failed. host: the naacp is scrutinizing a los angeles branch over its honor for dollar -- four donald sterling. the owner of the clippers in the

news over the last week. next is paul, joining us from oliver springs, tennessee. caller: good morning, i want to

thank you for taking my call. this is very important to me. this happened on september 11, 9/11. that date is very important to us republicans. is that for important to them stinking democrats who don't have enough sense to wipe their hind ends. this happened in a country that hated our guts, just like his people over here in iraq hated our guts. then we went to war in iraq. it was not president bush that took us to war, it was congress who took us to war. congress declared war on this country, not president bush. it was 17 other countries that walked into that country with us and died there, too. it was president bush who was the leader of this country when we went in. if this had been this black man leading, we would have never gone.

hillary clinton signed the declaration of war to send us to war. and then she sits there and blames it on bush like the stupid democrats that colin and don't have enough sense to know that we lost americans have fought for this country, that meant something to this country. they need to get off their hands and get the racist democratic two-faced -- remember that this happened on september 11 very . a look at some other headlines. calls for the trenton mayor to resign in the wake of some new audio and video.

from the denver post. and, a related story on marijuana from the front page of the pits were post-gazette. -- of the pittsburgh post-gazette. more on the benghazi investigation and the latest from senate republicans, including senator lindsey graham, who followed john mccain on the senate floor yesterday with these remarks. >> a talk about 25 thousand documents they provided. -- they talk about 25,000 documents they provided.

it is a relevance of the documents and significance of the documents. the reason they did not want you, me, and anyone else in about this e-mail, because the use smoking guns that show that people on the white house level now these are people i work for the administration, were very intent on shaping the story about benghazi away from what they knew to be the truth. here's the problem for the white house. this was seven weeks before an election. president obama had said repeatedly that latin is dead, al qaeda is on the run, the wars receding. my foreign policy is working. host: the question we're asking this friday morning, is the benghazi story important to you. we have a call from michigan. go ahead, please. caller: i want to say it is very important to me, especially as a woman.

i'm in my 50's. i've been voting since i am 18. i've always crossed party lines and it came to women because i always felt we are underrepresented. however, i absolutely do not want hillary clinton to be the first female president. his woman has no morals. she should've been doing her job . she was busy making up lies to cover herself and her boss so that they could get reelected. that is all they cared about. there's no moral integrity in this administration. i'm telling you, i have been a lifelong democrat heard at another i will ever vote for democratic again in my life. host: we're getting your comment on the benghazi story. the other store that will get a lot of attention over the

weekend is the 100th annual white house correspondents association dinner. in case you missed it, the very first enter, every different affair, all-white, all-male, back in 1923. look at how the dinner has evolved from inside the spouse section -- from this -- from inside the style section. this is not about washington. look at some of the celebrities. we will have live coverage of the dinner itself which will be getting underway at 6:00 eastern time at c-span and c-span radio. you can follow it online at c-span.org. we will have the red carpet as well and the replay of the overnight schedule. meanwhile, ron fournier of "the national journal." the typical white house reporter considers the president's team the most secretive in memory stingier with information than the tightlipped bush white

house. according to a clinical survey prone to lies. the press corps is also relatively inexperienced, with 39% on the beat and five years or less. it is a couple of recommendations. first, don't let the white house at the ground rules. second, don't worry about rough coverage hurting relationships of access. actually, it helps. we'll go to white house briefings, they are a waste of time. the secretary really makes news. and, use the dinner to the public's advantage. for my first decade or so in washington, the dinner was a useful way to build relationships with potential sources. the full story is available online at "national journal.com." what is the congress doing to move this country forward?

all i can hear on the radio is that -- the people are tired. they really want to move forward. caller: the only americans that have been killed overseas. we have thousands of americans coming into this country every day. every year, thousands of them come in body bags. nobody is talking about that. just for americans -- just 4 americans. for what? people want to move forward. people want to get paid and get out of this whole mess is going on. host: from maryland, cliff says this very its. this morning, inside

"the new york times." senate is preparing for a keystone vote. by the way, our guest on c-span's newsmakers this sunday is senator john hoven, a republican senator that says he is 56 votes needed to say that the keystone xl pipeline should in fact the build. one of the questions is whether or not congress has that authority. he says newsmakers there's at 10:00 eastern time on sunday. we are being joined from ohio by the republican line. caller: this is very important. all the american people should be worried about this. like the one guy from tennessee says, fast and furious, lies of

health care, we are on the verge of having a corrupt government. it is just my opinion. we have news channels now that run and get the memos every day from the government. it is real important. people should worry about this, because in the future, this is going to affect all of us as americans. thank you. host: al, thanks for the call. this is just another one to win an election for americans who were murdered. hillary clinton lied to the family's faces. it ministration is hiding something bigger. this from james in fort worth, texas.

our last call comes to us from louisiana. caller: good morning. i cannot believe my ears this morning area i know there were at least two people that said oh, we shouldn't be bothered with this. they knew it was dangerous? this is an excuse for letting this cover-up go? their lives are worthless, they knew they could have been killed . i do know about you, but that just blows my mind. host: sherry, thanks for the call.

one of the story want to bring to attention is from "usa today." he rates the president said he is worked with over the years. he describes fdr as a giant. hubbell a one of the three greatest presidents in u.s. history. dwight eisenhower.

to take a short break and when we come back, we will take a look at some 2014 campaign ads. then, our friday roundtable, we will look at economic sanctions are they effective u.s. policy? first, from the senate floor yesterday, a moment of bipartisanship as a senators talk about the retirement of the outgoing sergeant at arms and police chief terry gainer -- harry gainer.

>> that is not the end of it, because he is also someone who is concerned and feels responsible for the thousands and thousands of people that come in this building every day. they're also part of this family. it is a huge family. he has nurtured and taking care of his family from his wife lorraine to the thousands of people that he is never known a never will know that come into the building. senators and staffers are often split along ideological lines but we all agree on one thing. we are utterly dependent on the sergeant at arms office. we are aware of the wonderful job that terry gainer has done as sergeant at arms. >> terry is a familiar presence in the halls

of the capital and also reassuring one. when you set terry you always had the sense that things were under control around here, even though you knew how much work and preparation went into it. it is the same feeling we might have being around the father of a large family, or a veteran big city cop. i think it is no accident that carries both of those things, as well. guess the bearing of a guy with long experience, who has seen it all. we have all gotten the experience over his ears hear. that is something that can't be bought. so those of you who watched the majority leader and myself are down here on the floor in the mornings, know that we don't agree on much, but picking terry was one decision that he got

just right. terry's resume is pretty well known by now. "washington journal con>> washington journal continues. guest: nice to be with you as always, steve. host: your essay on campaign ads, what did you learn? guest: i've been following to the campaign ads literally since 1960. ever watch thousands and thousands of them. not a whole lot surprises me. you know, the themes change from year to year. you can kind of get a sense of what is actually happening out there. one of the themes that i didn't cover in the article, have you noticed how many kids are in the

ads? how many spouses, how my grandma's? these candidates noted people a politic so much and is so suspicious of congress in them that they need personal validation from somebody who knows them well to recommend them to the broader electorate. they are just everywhere. we have had caroline kennedy appear as a photo and john f. kennedy spot in 1960. we all remember the daisy spot with a little girl picking petals off a daisy for lbj before nuclear madness. we have sometimes had whole families of kids saying that dad is great, mom is traffic, they must be getting extra privileges at home. something is coming out of it. host: learning from the table one example that you did not put in your essay. this is from the kentucky republican primary where mitch

mcconnell is being challenged by matt devon. polls are showing ahead in the polls. a new ad from the devon campaign on the new topic that you just mentioned. crisis is a bunch of lies being told about my dad. >>-- this is a bunch of lies being told about my dad. he will make a great senator. i should know. i've known him my whole life. i approve these messages. and i approve these messengers, two. host: what would somebody who's watching these ads on the web or on television to noon or two not? -- tune in or tune out?

guest: children are adorable and when they surround a candidate for public office, it makes a candidate more attractive, too. host: $5 billion. this is the amount we will likely seen spent in this campaign season, most of it spent on advertising. guest: you never know the exact percentage in advance. most of the money is spent on television, at least the money after you subtract out the stuff and office rent and that kind of thing. a lot of people questioned that. maybe the money would be better spent with voter contacts, with voter id, finding out how the people in various key neighborhoods and swing districts feel, and making sure they get out to vote. the fundamentals, steve, is just the same as when abraham lincoln described it before his presidential campaign.

find them, and vote them. the question is, whether tv ads really motivate people to get out the vote. they even persuade people and is highly partisan era. most people have their minds made up, at least for the general election. i think tv ads are much more influential in prime areas, when you're picking a republican, you agree with everybody, most everybody on most everything. if you're a democrat, you agree with most everybody. the little personal factors make a big difference in tv ads. host: let's go through a couple of as you highlighted. this is from a senate race in oregon. an oregon republican who is challenging senator merkley in this midterm election. was interesting about this spot

is that the candidate is pro-choice, but listen carefully how they argument was framed. >> the doctor said there something wrong with your baby's spine. dr. levy was the first person that gave us hope. she was the first person that said, congratulations, you're having a daughter. dr. wehby hugged me and touch my four head. he said its going to be ok, sweetheart. i've got her, and i will see you in a couple of hours. i gave her the most precious thing i had, i trusted her. we have a 12-year-old today because of dr.wehby. she will always do the right thing. she will act with integrity.

all of washington needs to be full of people like dr. wehby. host: why did you highlight this particular ad? guest: because it was so powerful, so emotional, so touching, and it accomplished a key political goal for dr. ni monica wehby. she saved the little girl's life. she could have possibly saved the mother from having an abortion, which i guess was perhaps recommended or suggested by others. this was a very pro-life decision, very personal. no one can watch that at and not identify with the mother and the little girl. i think it accomplished a political purpose, but it also made an emotional connection

four monica wehby who is a front runner to be the republican nominee for senate. congressman nick baggage was on a plane that also included help box. both were killed in the early 1970's. here's how his son's framing his childhood and what it is like to be a senator from alaska. in alaska, you go as far as it takes to see people we know -- >> baggage goes to the people wherever you are. >> we have lost too many. mark is clearly his father's son.

there's no place he will go to listen and stand up for alaskans. he forced washington to open up the arctic ocean to oil drilling. he strengthened our coast guard. he has refused the pay raise until the budget is balanced. i am prouder still of him as a father. and what he learned from his own. >> i am mark baggegich, and i approve this message. host: this is all the emotions. a wife and mother, a father. guest: also, steve, it is a history lesson. your probably too young to remember this incident. back in 1972, october 72, it was

a national story, obviously, when congress and baegich along with majority leader hale boggs, were lost in a small plane crash and no one has ever found the plane wreckage. 39%, only 39% of alaskans were actually born in alaska. many of them have no memory of this whatsoever. this taught an important history lesson that tied mark b egich to alaska in a way that rate was very palatable. the presentation of the in various forms and over many generations. host: this is going to be a year that citizens united will be

fully in place. we will see an influx of outside groups spending money on some of the most important races in the country. guest: absolutely. they are almost all negative. there is an occasional positive spot from those groups but mainly it is negative, vicious character rending advertising, they are responsible to nobody. their job is to destroy the opposition. it is very negative. in my piece," i focus on -- mips in -- in my piece in "politico," i focus on positive advertising, this is the season for it. most of the challengers in races that have determined the party nominees, they are figh

ting november already and want to create a positive image of the candidate. we will be flooded before november with vicious, negative advertising. but not right now. you can actually find some good uplifting ads. >> talking about television advertising, larry sabatino is the director of the university of virginia center for politics. get more information at center for politics.org. we want your calls and comments, send us an e-mail or a tweet at @cspanwj. larry sabato, here is one of those ads. [video clip] >> in the 1970's, cochran voted with jimmy carter. he voted for the read my lips tax increase.

today, cochran votes with obama to raise the national debt by trillions. five decades in washington is enough. club for growth action is responsible for the content of this advertising. host: you have to wonder where do they come up with some of these awful pictures of the candidates. [laughter] guest: well, we all take bad photos from time to time. almost all my photos are bad. it's really not that difficult. what is interesting about that ad if you watched it in isolation and did not know thad cochran's record, you would think this is a liberal senator from mississippi. if you look at congressional quarterly's or national journals, thad cochran is a conservative senator. he votes overwhelmingly with the republican caucus on almost everything against president

obama. it is effective at least for its target audience, say the tea party in mississippi. it suggested that you cannot count on thad cochran. he is going to defect when it really matters. i am sure cochran has answers to each of those votes cited in the ad, it is up to him to come up with a counter ad. host: one of our viewers saying "how come that romney is not present?" larry sabato, your response. guest: both sides spent about equally, both had all the money they could possibly have. in presidential elections television advertising is lee's effective because -- is least effective because the average voter has so many other sources. from friends and neighbors

and family to the news media. they gather information from so many places that no single ad can have the power of the 1964 daisy spot that didn't help lyndon johnson, who was -- that did help lyndon johnson, who was going to win against goldwater anyway. i do not buy the theory that it matters in presidential elections. there is a point of diminishing returns and i think both candidates reached that early october 2012. host: you make a reference to this ad in 1952, before you were born, larry sabadtto. [laughter] guest: i was born. host: let's watch. [video clip] >> eisenhower answers america. >> the democrats have made mistakes, but aren't there intentions good? >> if the driver of your school bus runs into a truck, drives

into a ditch, you do not say his intentions are good -- you get a new boss trevor. -- a new bus driver. host: larry sabato? guest: that shows you how primitive television was and television advertising. eisenhower was the first presidential candidate to go out and hire an advertising firm to produce his ads. he was a brilliant general but could not read cue cards worth a damn. there were some others that were even worse. his opponent, at least even send -- adlai stevenson said president should not be sold like soapsuds. stevenson lost and one of the first things stephen saidvenson did four years later was higher in madison avenue firm to handle

his second campaign. he went on to lose by more, it does not necessarily make a difference. host: joining us from alabama. with larry sadler joining us from the university of virginia. caller: a house divided will soon fall. i am looking for candidates who can work together. all these guys -- i do not trust the money guys. all these guys going up there -- they are not fighters. they are leaving millionaires. they go of their regular guys and leave millionaires. i am looking for someone who is not going up there to fill their pockets and to exercise power. i am looking for guys going out there to serve. i am an ex army guy and i served. host: thank you for the call. larry sabato, that sums up the

sentiment of what many people feel. your friends and colleagues tom mann and norm ornstein wrote in "broken branch." guest: sure, there are lots of congressmen and senators that fit the description the gentleman was suggesting, my slogan for decades has been "politics is a good thing." the truth is in my experience, i have known over 40 plus years in and around politics. i have known a lot of members of congress, most of them are very dedicated, they are extremely hard-working and care about their issues. they have an ideology they fight for. we always focus on the bad because that is the headline. nobody wants to read a headline that 410 members of congress were not indicted today.

we focus on the one person who was indicted. i don't think any of us would want to be categorized by the worst in our profession. host: this is a comment from one of our viewers. other than tom coburn, if you are out there to serve -- few are out there to serve. mike from pennsylvania. >>caller: we have billions of dollars to spend on ads yet we have all these people waiting for -- i find it really strange you have money to spend for this stuff. we watched c-span all day, we do not meet sentimental ads. it is a bunch of bull and they need to get to the people who are struggling. there is stuff on tv, it is a slap in the face. the guy showed us his family living the good life. my wife had to leave the kids because we could not afford our

place. these commercials are not selling nothing to the american people. watch c-span and learn who these people are and get to know them. host: what about that point, larry sabato? guest: i'm a veteran c-span watcher. i much prefer to watch it without commentary. that is what you get on c-span. his point about a lot of what appears in the commercials is will, of course that is true. you only get one side of the equation. the theory is that you get the other side of the equation from the unregenerate -- you get the other side of the equation from the other candidate's ads. but in so many races the finding is so unbalanced, one side has four or five times more than the other candidate. you never get the full picture. you might want to show the pig ad animals are playing a role in politics this year. host: you are reading our minds.

we have that ready. it is titled "squeal." jenny ernst in iowa uses the c word. the assessment of larry sabato a look at midterm ads including this one. [video clip] >> i grow up castrating hogs on a farm. when i get to washington, i will know how to cut pork. >> mother, soldier conservative. >> it is time to force washington to do the same. cut wasteful spending, repeal of omnicare, and balance the budget. washington is full of big spenders let's make them squeal. [laughter] host: i do not know what to say larry sabato. is that a first? castration in an ad.

guest: absolutely, i have never seen an ad involving castration of any animals, that is a first. it was very clever. she was nowhere near the front runner before that ad, now she is the co-frontrunner with mark jacobs, a businessman who is outspending her. she is in the running and that iowa primary, which is in early june. if no one gets 35% out of the five candidates, they go to a convention. she became the co-frontrunner she got loads of national publicity. that ad was aired for free dozens and dozens of time on news shows because it was so unusual to put it kindly. third, she was able indirectly to stick it to the democratic nominee for senate, congressman bruce braley, who had made a speech in private interpreted as

being a day cap farmers. -- being a dig at farmers. you do not do that running for senate in the hawkeye state. host: a reference to the 1952 ad. it must have been produced by "madmen." [laughter] mary in kentucky. caller: i am sorry. that was a new one. host: the ad? caller: i grew up on a farm with cows, chickens, pigs i still work on a firm. i can do the cows, chickens, and pigs. [laughter] sorry, that threw me for a loop. everybody has got internet.

that threw me off track so bad. the dish network saying that you can zip through these things or positive and skip over them. tell them to use their money and knock on doors and say if i do not keep my promises to you, i will resign. no if, and, or but. do not feed me a bunch of bull. sir, do you know what it means. my mama would have soap in your mouth. i am an old-timer. these commercials aimedn't worth two cents. nobody watches a darn thing unless you are stuck with regular television. host: you like that joni ernst

ad? caller: i am a farmer, i know how to fix a cow that don't get me nowhere. i want to know what your ethics are, what you are going to do and if you are going to keep your promises. if not get out of congress. host: larry sabato there you have it. your response? guest: i like the word "fix" better than castration. a delightful comment from a delightful person. her idea of getting a candidate back into the neighborhood going door-to-door is a great idea. it is still goes on almost everywhere and it is effective in small population states. if you are from the dakotas, you expect to see your candidates over and over again, you have that opportunity. california, new york texas,

even my state of virginia, which has 8 million people, it is impossible. you cannot do person to person campaigning very much. as far as agreeing to resign if you do not live up to your promises, i have not heard many candidates say that. i have heard the occasional candidate say if i do not fix a budget problem in my first term, i will not run again. it happened once in north dakota, i believe it was senator kent conrad, he stepped down temporarily. temporarily, he got back with the other senator died. host: "attack ads can be amusing but i never taken seriously." let me go back to the technology issue. the other caller made reference to tivo, you can scan through the ads. the influx of digital media what challenges does that give

campaigns and ad makers? guest: a very serious challenge. that is why you are seeing a larger percentage of the budget in many campaigns being devoted to internet advertising. i am sure we have all noticed that when we go to certain websites and are looking at news websites, there are ads for particular candidates. in one manner or another, they have figured out your partisan identification or your likely partisan identification, or that you are persuadable. they are going to insert a message that is targeted just to you. i think we are all frightened by how much information has been accumulated about each and every one of us. not just by the nsa, we are talking about advertisers and campaign firms. this is all bought and sold and easily available. that is why we see the ads we do on the internet and it is only going to increase. host: one of those is a

candidate challenging john boehner in his southwest ohio district near cincinnati. using humor as a tool to go after the long serving speaker and member of the house of representatives. we will show you the spot in its entirety. [video clip] >> you make a great team. your electile dysfunction could be a question of blood flow. when a politician has been in d.c. toulon, a goes to his head. used on a daily basis winteregg would help you every time the moment is right. when using winteregg, the borders will be secure, common sense will be used in solving the nation's problems. other signs of electile dysfunction might include the inability to maintain a spine in

the face of liberal opposition. if you have a boehner lasting longer than six years wintere gg. i am jd winteregg, i approved this message. host: larry sabato highlights this ad. does the spot go too far? guest: how can i say yes on television? there is a role for cialis, but it is certainly not an political tv ads. this went way over the top and was offensive to lots of people. it could've been done more tastefully -- i do not think he could have given the subject. he has no chance of all in the primary and i am sorry to say the fellow has been discharged from his teaching job. i don't want anyone to be

unemployed but there are consequences when you put a tv ad like this on the air. host: larry in amsterdam, new york for larry sabato from the university of virginia. caller: that advertisement by eisenhower brought me back, i was 10 years old and i have my picture taken with the vice presidential candidate that year. anyway it amazes me that people can be influenced by this type of advertising. these guys would sell their daughters and wives into prostitution to get themselves elected. you get so sick and tired of hearing that stuff, this is one of the reasons i listen to c-span. you get some sort of truth. the thing about not being able to get to the people anymore that is a bunch of crap. the house of representatives is a house that represents the people. they are supposed to represent

so many people and there is no reason why they cannot. if there is too many people for each number of the house to represent, we ought to have more representatives so people do get to see their candidates in person. this representation today, these guys will take any figure and twist them. that is why i'm an independent i get tired of hearing this stuff. host: thank you for the call from new york. larry sabato when it comes time for those running for office to spend time on the campaign trail raising more and more money in ever-increasing races, how is the time divided? guest: the time is increasingly divided towards raising money. all of us who have been lucky enough to be in this field and have access privately to congressmen and senators and we get to ask them off the record what they hear about their jobs, most of them will say the

increasing amount of time even during the day, when they have to leave their offices and go down to party headquarters and dial for dollars. they are given a list of people who have been donors or might be donors and they have to call and give their pitch. these are hours that are taken away from deliberation legislation, constituency services. i want to go back to the gentleman's idea, that is not off the wall, to increase the size of the house of representatives. in a book on the constitution, i proposed raising the total number of members of congress in the house of representatives to about 1000, which would have been appropriate given the formula that george washington wanted. people always say i do not want more of them, i want to keep the same budget or even reduce it, the budget for congress. they would have fewer people to

represent and then we could get back, perhaps, to more person to person interaction and representation. it is not an off-the-wall idea. however, as with all amendments and major changes in our polarized era it is scheduled for the 12th of never. host: larry sabato from the university. "the washington post" on one of the key senate races in arkansas. mark pryor in a tough reelection battle. david farenthold describes the reelection race. the first ad by the pryor campaign was this. [video clip] >> i'm not ashamed to say i believe in god. the bible teaches us no one has all the answers, only god does. neither political party is always right. this is my compass, my

northstar. it gives me comfort and guidance to do what is best for arkansas. i am mark pryor and i approved this message because this is who i am and what i believe. host: larry sabato, that ad cannot lay last year. mark pryor is a democrat and his father served as a democrat. longtime friend of the clintons, no reference to democrat or democratic party in a state that is increasingly republican. guest: i do not think any state has turned so sharply republican in recent times as arkansas, unless maybe west virginia for some of the same reasons. that ad was heavily criticized by democratic media advertising specialists, privately, not publicly. sophisticates perhaps are turned off by what pryor said. you have to remember the

arkansas electorate. in recent elections in the white evangelical christians have been close to 60% of the turnout. this kind of appeal can actually make a difference. it is an emotional appeal but in pryor's sense reveals what he considers to be important or tries to sell that idea. host: one poll has him up, a long way between now and november. we will cover all the campaigns on the c-span network. steve from austin, texas, good morning. caller: good morning, thank you. i would ask you sam rayburn years ago when he retired from sticker of the house he only had a few thousand dollars in his checking account. these guys are retiring as millionaires. are these guys allowed to keep their advertising budget after they retire?

how are these guys retiring as millionaires? after only making under $200,000 a year. host: thank you, we will get a response. larry sabato? guest: a very good question, i hear that a lot. first of all, no, they cannot keep for personal use what is in their campaign accounts. it is forbidden. i do not think any honest congressman or congresswoman would do that. a few get in trouble. the more important point there is yes, they do retire as millionaires. you have to understand one thing, i believe a substantial majority of the members of congress are millionaires when they go in. why do i say i think so, because the disclosure forms for their financial disclosure have vague categories. it is difficult to tell precisely what many of them are worth. we certainly know, at least one

third of the members of congress, are millionaires, multimillionaires, hundred millionaires. i strongly suspect the majority are millionaires going in. one reason for this is because of what it takes to campaign for office. you are expected to put up a state yourself, the party expects you to do it. maybe $50,000 or $100,000. if you are wealthy, millions. you take off a year or two years from what you are doing. no one can work their regular job and run for congress. they have to support their families and two residences in most cases. i'm not making excuses for them. i'm explaining why we have developed a system whereby the wealthy dominate congress. people always say the wealthy have always dominated congress and i suspect that is true. there were periods in american

life when it was not true and average people could get elected. we have moved away from that and i don't know -- we will never go back to the mom and pop campaign and probably we will never go back to the mom and pop candidate who gets elected. host: i want to ask you about jeb bush. front page in "the new york times," how wealthy republican donors might support jeb bush. do you think he is going to run? guest: he certainly was not going to run if you his son a couple years ago. we had his son in texas, who is running and will win easily, we have him in charlottesville and he all but told an audience in public he did not believe his father would run. things change and i think a lot of people in the republican establishment thought chris christie could be sold as their nominee. that now is a bridge too far

interoperability -- in all probability. they returned to jeb bush because if there is one year when dynasty may not matter, it is 2016. you might have two dynasties running against each other clinton versus bush. host: in your piece for politico you take a look at one candidate running for reelection this year, john kasich of ohio. his ad makers may have their eye on 2016, let's watch. [video clip] >> he grew up in a hard-working steel town on the ohio river. it was here john kasich's father carried the mail six days a week. his grandfather worked in the coal mine. his mother was the daughter of immigrants. here john kasich learned the value of a job. the dignity of work, and a passion for helping others.

when he stepped out on his own those values went with him. here john kasich earned a degree and graduated a proud but that. -- a proud buckeye. he led a team that balanced a budget and ignited job growth. here, he married karen and became the father of twin girls. today, as john kasich leads ohio to a new day of job creation it is the values he learned here. governor john kasich. host: larry sabato why did you want to highlight that particular spot? guest: there are some candidates this year who are running double campaigns, whether they admit it or not. they are running for reelection and trying to keep their eye on the ball. john kasich is running in ohio governor scott walker in a wisconsin. there is a sub subterranean

campaign, washington 2016. look at that ad, impressive, high production value, smooth. as you listen to it and you watch those pretty pictures, it sure did sound like ohio values could be iowa values too. host: larry sabato's rules for effective campaign advertising what we you include? -- what would you include? guest: the honest. if you are not you are going to pay for it sooner or later. they could become a gaffe. if your attack is inaccurate, you will pay and have to spend money to correct it. i do believe that it is the best mixture to have positive and negative. you have to give some reason to believe in you some reason to vote for you. it is not simply destroying the

opponent. those are two good rules. that is enough for now. host: director of the center for politics at the university. his most recent book is titled "the kennedy half century." a frequent guest on this network, he is a regular columnist for politico. professor larry sabato, thank you for being with us. guest: thank you. i really enjoyed it. host: we will turn our attention to the issue of sanctions and whether or not they work. our guests from the foundation for defense democracies and the council on foreign relations to offer their perspective on the issue of sanctions. later, a look at the high school graduation rate, now reaching 80% across the country. what that means for high school graduates and those pursuing higher education. all weekend on c-span2's book tv

and american history tv, we travel to utah. we hope you tune in as we explore the history and literary life of the city. here is the mayor of ogden utah talking about the role of the transcontinental railroad and its impact on that part of the country. cocteau -- >> ogden is about 30 miles north of salt lake city. we have mountain to metro accessibility. i think ogden is best known for being the junction city. we started when the transcontinental railroad came through to tie the road rose together. being one of the rail hubs, that historical time, for 100 years the steam trains would come through every four or four and half hours to refill coal cars. every single railroad trip had to stop in ogden city for 100

years. everything that happened happened in part with ogden. when you have that type of a transportation hub you get a lot of industrial things that tend to cluster around the transportation hub like that. we were a blue-collar rail town. a really rich history. >> the biggest challenge especially in the house, where redistricting occurs, the biggest challenge that a republican is going to face is from somebody more conservative in a primary. in almost every district that is the case. that is what they are worried about. they are worried about being challenged from the right. how is it in a political interest to reach across and make compromises? we have the system that we designed.

when we created the districts, i am not even sure the people who created the districts realized how profound the implications of this would be. to some extent, some democrats and particularly minority democrats, have been in on this too. in some states, there have been african americans who want to be sure that they have reliably african-american districts not just democrats but a large percentage of african-american voters so they can be sure they have representation. >> this weekend, from the anti-defamation league, changing demographics redistricting, and the republican party. saturday morning after 11:00 eastern. later on c-span, the white house correspondents dinner. president obama and joe m chale of "community," live at 6:00.

live sunday on booktv, former saying member and political candidate luis j. rodriguez will take your calls and comments. on american history tv, hawaii and the sugar industry. sunday night at 9:35 on c-span3. "washington journal" continues. host: our friday roundtable focusing on the issue of sanctions as a foreign-policy tool, do they work? carla anne robbins is a senior fellow at the council on international relationship. mark dubowitz of the foundation for democracy. "the wall street journal" the president meets with angela merkel. german companies opposing sanctions, can you explain. guest: german companies opposed sanctions against iran, it is no surprise they are opposing

sanctions against russia. the german corporate lobby is very strong. it is a very strong economic relationship between germany and russia. including former german chancellor, who is making a lot of money helping natural gas flow from russia to germany. no surprise. angela merkel is under pressure. host: one of the fundamental flaws of sanctions as a foreign-policy tool? guest: it is limited and a blunt instrument but also there is no other choice. not a lot of other alternatives. politics are flawed, too. germany is russia's's largest trading partner in the eu. they have more economic interest in the u.s. and its owing to be hard to pressure russia and a major way unless the europeans are willing to play. host: let me share what jack lew told members of congress when it

came to sanctions and at russia and the wealthy individuals linked to president putin. [video clip] >> if you look at the impact on russia's economy, it is misleading to look at what happens day by day. you have to look over the period of time since russia went into crimea and since we have imposed sanctions. there has been a substantial deterioration in rush's already weak economy. we see and the stock exchange on the exchange rate. they were downgraded to one notch above junk. what the rationale on the bond rating was in part with sanctions. how do we proceed in a careful way? president clinton has acknowledged -- resident pu -- president putin has a knowledge

of the sanctions are creating pressure. we need to keep our options open. we are prepared to take more action and we have made clear we are prepared that the policy of russia does not change. the reality is working in partnership with our allies is the most effective way. we are seeing movement there. the europeans made additional designations. host: back to the issue of partnership. one of the big challenges are what companies and what countries want, we are seeing that in germany. guest: partnership is important. karl is right, the trading relationship between the u.s. and russia is worth by eu-russia trade. there is no substitute for u.s. leadership and we learned that in iran. the european nations did not want to impose sanctions, the u.s. administration and the u.s.

congress really put these companies to a choice, do business in iran or the u.s. it was u.s. leadership that allowed sarkozy of france to get the other 27 eu members to do something meaningful. that is what is missing right now. host: carla anne robbins another headline from "the new york times." peter baker says the sanctions have limited impact. he makes a point that many issues involving russia's economy predates sanctions and even pretty the annexation of crimea. guest: the piece makes two points. one is that the russian economy was slowing to begin with. it was in pretty bad shape. a lot of the impact of the huge amount of capital flight, the drop in the stock market and the value of the ruble while it might predates sanctions, it began at the time of the crimea crisis because people were expecting sanctions.

the market had already factored in the crisis. if you stay at the current level of sanctions, i would suppose people would say it was bad but not as bad as we thought and we might want to go back in. that is the argument for why you cannot stay where you are you will have to ratchet it up to drive more people out or prevent people from going back in./ host: why sanctions, why are they used? guest: this is the ultimate example, what else are you going to do against the russians? they have nuclear weapons, you're not going to talk about a military intervention. they are violating international law and doing a very bad thing. one needs to find ways to pressure them. the problem is you have to think about what you want to accomplish you do not want to destroy the russian economy. you want to change putin's mind, that is a very hard thing to do because it depends on one person who does not seem to care about his own people.

that is always the case with authoritarians and sanctions. guest: i agree but i think sanctions are becoming the default instrument of statecraft in the u.s. and being used in isolation as a silver bullet. sanctions are never a silver bullet. they might be silver shrapnel, they can would an economy already suffering. they have to be used as a tool of statecraft. i think the administration made a mistake taking the military option off the table, not talking about sending u.s. troops to ukraine. what about military support to the ukrainian military so people can fight? the president is to quit to imagine a sequence of the ponzi and sacre -- the president is too quick to imagine a sequence of diplomacy and sanctions. you have got to arms were diplomacy and use sanctions and the threat of military force or military support to provide teeth to to diplomacy.

putin knows he can bear the brunt of sanctions and he has his sights set on eastern europe. i don't think there is anything we can do right now with sanctions alone. host: another conversation with some other countries, you wrote about this for bloomberg.com with regards to syria and north korea trying to choke off economic lifelines in these countries. and you point out that sanctions really w -- sanctions rarely work. guest: there are cases where they work, open the doors to negotiations or changed invested politics. it has had no impact on north korea and is having no impact on syria. mainly because in those two places there is not a lot of leverage or trade in the first place. the russians are supporting the syrians, the chinese are

trading with the north koreans. these are two awful governments that do not care if their own people are suffering. you can have punishment on an economy and you can start of a starving people, in theory, if your government does not care that is not a tool that's going to be a silver bullet. there is a lot of silver shrapnel, as you said. host: we heard from senator bob corker on the foreign relations committee, you sent out h a tweet when he appeared on "face the nation." we heard from senator corker and other republicans trying to oppose more sanctions. guest: i think they are ratcheting up sanctions and pressure on the people around putin trying to change his mind, it seems like a good idea. what you do not want to do is try blogger and say this is a substitute for action. that is the mistake in syria

don't worry, we will put sanctions on or threaten criminal court action. when a guy like assad does not care and the russians are supporting him. they have to think about pressure on putin and the people around him. ultimately, if he continues to do what he is doing, more pressure on the russian economy. host: back to the european union and the u.s. imposing these sanctions, would we be more effective if the u.s. did it unilaterally? i we tied into europe? guest: we need multilateral sanctions, no doubt. in the history of sanctions suggests that when we moved laterally, it is not -- only move unilaterally it is not effective, cuba is an example. no substitute for u.s. leadership. there are 28 eu nations with their own mercantile interests. everybody is pursuing their own economic interests.

when the u.s. congress exerts leadership and european countries are facing the prospect of u.s. sanctions and they continue to do business with designated individuals engaged in illicit finance that provides the moment of clarity for those corporate executives. the u.s. treasury department demonstrated this under the bush administration and the obama administration with escalated campaign against iran. under the bush administration, we have the opportunity to use sanctions to scare the north koreans and we did. we designated a bank in asia and it unleashed financial theories. the north koreans were terrified. unfortunately we surrender that leverage trying to get a diplomatic eel with north korea on the nuclear file. the genie is out of the bottle. host: from "the economist," what what america fight for?

the narrative, carla anne robbins, we let syria crossed the red line and the echo chamber is that the u.s. is weak on these issues. guest: that is always the criticism, the u.s. and decline, that is a favorite political argument. i have always been fascinated every time i go to london, every academic working on american studies says this is the end of the american era. this is premature. i do think syria is a horror, it is not as if the europeans have stepped up on syria either. there is no substitute for leadership. iran i cannot guarantee the iranians are going to cut a deal, but around is a pretty effective argument for both american leadership and for the efficacy of sanctions. i do not think rouhani would have won if there were not so much pressure on the iranian economy. there is concern and fear and does president is defining a new

sort of american leadership that has a lot of people in europe -- a lot of whining in europe. if we are too strong, they hate it, if we are to we, they hate it. "the economist" is fabulous covers very provocative. host: the defense of democracy? guest: we are a think tank that defends freedom. we have done a lot of work on issues of illicit finance and sanctions and the utility of economic warfare. it is an organization committed to that instrument of statecraft. we are also well positioned to criticize it when it is being overused. david sanger described it as the favorite non-combatant command. the treasury department deserves credit for running a sanctions campaign against iran and north

korea. the problem is not just what you do on the escalation curve, it is when you start to lift sanctions. iran is a great example of where economic leverage was built up president rouhani was elected because of the economic pressure. we are in nuclear negotiations and at the very time when we have maximum leverage to force and alley, and -- to force the supreme leader to make a choice, we blinked. now iran will retain the essential elements of a nuclear infrastructure. we have diminished pressure and i think we will end up with a bad nuclear deal and ultimately not solve the problem. guest: i could not disagree more. with all respect when you talk about sanctions you have to think about what it is you want what is the goal here?

the goal with russia is not to overthrow putin, the goal is to get him to pull back in ukraine. the goal with iran is to get a deal that would make it harder to build a nuclear weapon. not to overthrow the iranian government. i don't think the iranian government was close to being overthrown and i don't think if you look at the iranian economy and the level of inflation and the level of unemployment, it is a small lessening of sanctions basically unfreezing like $8 billion. most companies are not going back in. they are interested in going back and but they are worried concisely because of the treasury department. we have these country sanctions that say if you do business with iranians you are going to suffer. we have cut the iranians off from the international financial community, that has had a huge impact on the iranian economy. if your goal is to overthrow the

government, you should not let any sanctions. if your goal is to get a negotiated settlement, you have got to give them a little incentive to stay up table. guest: the goal is to reach a nuclear deal. to reach a nuclear deal, history has demonstrated you have to put their clerics at the choice between the survival of the regime and a nuclear weapon. ali khamenei will not change his strategic oculus with respect to nuclear weapons until he believes his regime is threatened. it was a friend in 2009 when iranians were on the street y elling "death to the dictator." carla has seen imf studies showing iran is experiencing a modest recovery. in 2012 we deal escalated -- in 2012 we de-escalated sanctions. rouhani has more leverage and is

less likely you going to get a deal that dismantles iran's nuclear program, that has been the goal. we are about to reach a bad deal that the first is because we have taken the leverage away. that is the fundamental issue with sanctions. you have got to build the leverage, know when to use it and you cannot prematurely diminish your negotiating leverage. we did that with north korea they are about to test their fourth nuclear weapon. host: in addition to mark dubowitz, carla anne robbins, a veteran of the wall street journal and former editor for the new york times in addition to her work at the city university of new york she is a fellow at the council on foreign relations. thank you for being with us. we want to get to your calls and comments. jim from connecticut, good morning. caller: hello, how are you doing? a great comment about sanctions. i was wondering if you have ever thought of the rest of the world

putting sanctions on our american political leaders. now that the lapdog media has not kept a lid on the fact that building seven was destroyed in a controlled explosion. host: we have addressed this issue in the past but we are going to move on. las vegas, nevada. caller: i am originally from palestine. they occupied my country sanctions only go for those who are gang bangers. the state of israel is a terrorist organization. russia europe, a controlled american policy and the media. especially wall street. everything put on sinus people -- on zionist people. host: i will stop you, we could

not disagree more with some of those points. guest: i am a lapdog because i am in the media and i am a zionist -- no one likes the press. host: we don't care what you say about us, just say the truth. richard in california. caller: thank you for c-span. my great-grandfather was a russian major and the white army. that fought the red army. i am third generation. i have only two questions. number 12 to carla, what international law are you talking about? who can place sanctions on the u.s., which is now the global bully? i will take your answer off and

thank you for your consideration. host: thank you, richard. guest: international law, you are not supposed to change borders through the use of force, basically. guest: i will take the second question, i don't consider the u.s. a bully, i think it is a force for good. you do have added an interesting point. as the u.s. uses sanctions as an instrument of statecraft, a raises the question of whether other countries like china will use sanctions against western interests. the power of our sanctions is because of the power of the u.s. dollar. the u.s. dollar is the global reserve currency. it is giving us the ability to use targeted financial sanctions against bad actors. the u.s. dollar diminishes in its power and prevalence, it might be that we see countries like china and russia using colors of against us, we need to guard against that. -- using

coercive sanctions against us, we need to guard against that. host: the sense of imports in eastern and european countries. we talked about germany, 30% of jeremy's energy is imported from russia. 91% of poland's energy, 73% in the czech republic 34% in the netherlands, 98% in slovakia and 86% in hungary. a contrast between some of the former soviet union satellite states and western europe but still significant. guest: it is an enormous amount of leverage. when the u.s. pressed for europe to stop trading in oil with iran they could make the difference up by asking the saudi's to pump more. this is a big deal, reagan did not want to send those gas lines. the russians have a huge amount

of leverage. the impact is not just on those countries and is potentially on the global economy. europe is beginning very slowly to recover. we saw with the euro crisis how interconnected the global economy is. this is something that has to be done very carefully. sanctions are not a scalpel they are a blunt instrument. host: this is from "the london telegraph," the headline -- the ukraine crisis and sanctions a blow to russia. this wrapped in the lives of the rich in russia has become the centerpiece to the west's response to putin's intervention in ukraine. the chances are that russia's troubled economy will be damaged. guest: i think that is right. i agree with secretary lew. the sanctions that are being put in place it is very much is a calibrateda process of

escalating sanctions. you create the expectations of more sanctions, that does the most damage. there is a chinese phrase, killed the chickens to scare the monkey's. guest: i've never heard that, i love it. guest: it explains how the u.s. treasury department ruled out sanctions. you pick individuals and institutions, sanction them, you send a message to the international community that you are serious and you rely on the fact that most ceos, when faced with escalating sanctions, are going to make decisions in their self interests to cut ties. the power of our dollar and increasingly the power of our energy molecules, we are becoming an energy superpower, which is giving us leverage against russia and the long game against clerics and tehran. host: our guests on friday

morning on the c-span "washington journal" to talk about sanctions. "foreign policy" magazine has a piece called smart sanctions a short history. available at foreignpolicy.com. judy from idaho. caller: i will remain on the line. my remarks are for mr. dubowitz you, sir. you said that we should not have taken the military option in the ukraine off the table. and the first thing that jumped into my mind is if we threatened military support to ukraine, putin would have doubled over laughing. even if we ship them and i take weapons -- even if we ship them anti-tank weapons, they do not know how to use them, they cannot maintain them.

there really is no military option. guest: the history of world war ii would suggest that the ukrainian partisans were pretty tough fighters who fought with a lot less. the reality is you are right the ukrainian military has been severely degraded and is in terrible shape. the ukrainians are a tough people and a proud people. they have shown a willingness to fight for independence and to preserve democracy. the suggestion here is not that the u.s. military have an intervention, it is providing more than ready to eat hamburgers, which is what we have provided. we have refused to provide night vision goggles and body armor some of the basic things they need to defend themselves. it sends the wrong message to vladimir putin. he is doubling over laughing because he realizes our response to his annexation of crimea and his agenda to take over more of eastern europe and expand the

sphere of the soviet influence is just to use economic pressure. it will not be a silver bullet, he needs to back it up with credible support of military force. host: >> it is only the intensity of the processing ukraine. it is the sign of a reluctant test reckless behavior. no lessons are learned from the past. the u.s. does literally nothing to impress its cronies. the deterioration of the situation in ukraine, this needs to change. host: that is from russia's deputy minister for foreign relations. caller: that doesn't make a lot of sense.

to go back to the military question tom up -- kiev has launched an attack to take back in the east. pro-russian groups seem to have considerable military resources. this may bring the debate back into this country about whether or not we should be doing more to arm the government and train them. what is motivated the obama administration and i understand their hesitation is the lasting you want to do is fund another civil war in the world. if putin is not going to back off, that debate will reengage. host: this is a list of the countries that the u.s. has sanctioned very of your reaction

to that list. guest: this is our default instrument. sanctions have played an important role. there are some success stories. there are important success stories. despite the huge mistakes made in iraq, we were successful in stripping saddam hussein of his nuclear weapons capability through the use of punishing sanctions. we should have continued them. we should have made them more targeted. they were hurting the iraq he people. an invasion was not needed. we could've used diplomacy and sanctions. we could have held his feet to the fire. host: also on tuesday, lawmakers

heard from jack lew. >> sanctions are not going to work. we will never have a enough teeth. we will never have the sanctions hearing you need sanctions and countries that can't bite back. they work well in north korea. it is harder against a country as large as russia. nobody is calling for combat troops on the ground to engage, we are talking about providing weaponry. we need to change his calculus. give ukrainian people a chance to stabilize their country. host: his argument is that

sanctions are not an effective tool. guest: it depends on the sanctions and what the goals are. his major point in that statement is it is harder to do with a large economy for which our allies are intertwined. this is a time of major frailty in the european economy. i think the goal here is not so much destroy the russian economy. the goal is to change putin's mind. if you look at serbia and milosevic, he changed his mind in part because his cronies were getting whacked by sanctions. " so he changed his mind when nato knocked over the cigarette factory owned by his friend. very rich people and crony

capitalism in russia, they might send people to go in and say it is not worth it to go any further. host: good morning. welcome to the program. caller: i think sanctions we devote as much sanctions as we can. the international community is not going to stand up and help the president in the situation we should stand down and let it work itself out. i think sanctions will work. i think the president is doing a good job handling the situation considering russia. what do you do? do you start world war iii russia mark --? sanctions are good. we did use as many as possible.

-- we need to use as many as possible. the international community to put sanctions in themselves. host: let's go back to january as the president used his state of the union address. he brought up sanctions generally and iran in particular. this is what he had to say. >> these negotiations will be difficult. they may not succeed. we are clear eyed about iran's support of terrorist organizations. we are clear about the mistrust between our nations. this is mistrust that can't be wished away. these negotiations don't the lot -- rely on trust. any long-term deal must be based on verifiable action that convinces us and the international community that iran is not building a nuclear bomb a.

if john f. kennedy and reagan could negotiate with the soviet union, surely america can negotiate with less powerful adversaries today. [applause] the sanctions we put in place make this opportunity possible. let me be clear. if this congress sends me a new sanctions bill now that threatens to derail these talks i will veto it. [applause] for the sake of our national security we must give diplomacy a chance to succeed. host: from january of this past year, the carrot and the stick as the president tries to thread the needle.

caller:guest: there is a lot of chest pounding going on on the hill. there is a lot of complaining from israel. the last thing i want to do is see these negotiations fail and have the united states blamed for it. if anybody is going to scuttle, it is going to be the iranians. some sort of posturing when there are already tough sanctions on iran, we get blamed internationally. guest: i disagree. the sanctions that were put in place were put in place by the congress during --. congress does not posture. these are meaningful.

that sanctions bill was a sanctions in waiting bill. if they walked away from negotiations and did not meet a deal, the sanctions were designed to enhance the presidents of negotiating leverage. it has been diminished. 12 months ago, the u.s. posture was stop. stop ship shut all facilities. in 12 months, they have basically moved out from our original position. they continue to diminish our negotiating leverage. the deal that i embrace and i long to see, will not do that.

it will defer the problem and be more likely we will be in a war and not less. guest: there are so many things in that statement that i disagree with. i don't know if there is going to did -- be a deal. given our history with the iranians, i do think it is worth trying to get a deal. giving the hardliners an excuse to pull out of this when they seem to want to try and move this forward because of economic pressure on the i think it is worth trying. if the congress was to have a sanctions in waiting bill, they can talk about it and not voted. that is where we are at this point. we took away an excuse. i think you could ever get a deal unless they gave away everything. i know they are violators.

they have the right to enrich uranium. i don't trust them. i think a deal with intrusive verification is the best you going to get. guest: the it -- administration does not agree. iran does not have a right to enrichment. they have engaged in decades of nuclear mendacity. they misled the international community in order to advance this nuclear program. there has to be a deal. my complaint with this is i think we are heading down the path of four. the deal is going to give iran a pathway to a nuclear weapon. when the international community has a crisis, iran is going to

do with they have always done. they will cheat and deceive and use the essential components to breakout a weapon and you will wake up one day with a nuclear armed iran. we should always negotiate with our enemies. we should have serious escalating sanctions. there should always be the credible threat of military force. nobody believes this president will use military force. if you take away the economic option. all you have is diplomacy and talk. we are going to lose.

host: this is a tweet from president rouhani. we are moving closer to sanctions. we see this as a vaught -- violation of human rights. guest: what is he going to say? i am weak in wasting my time as a negotiator? he has domestic politics like we have it. he has to say it is worse -- worth giving up something because it will get better. i don't know if they're willing to make a deal. all i know is that one of the reasons you are against military action, we can bomb the place and it will set them back two years. you want to get the best deal you can and verify it as much as you can.

it is not perfect. this may not be settled once and for all. it is going to be an ongoing issue. it is better than war and better than a bomb. host: this program is carried live every day on c-span radio around the country. around table looking at sanctions, are they effective? our guests are mark dubowitz and carla anne robbins. caller: sanctions and i work against russia. under the reagan administration was nuclear deterrence. they are building up their weapons while we are destroying our military and firing it --

generals the know how to conduct proper warfare. sanctions are fine. it is never worked against iraq. we had to use military force against saddam hussein. we're going to be taken over and the soviet union will be back. guest: i agree to an extent. in a time of declining defense budgets is sending the wrong message to iran and syria and russia. we do have a conference of policy. sanctions sometimes do work. they don't work in isolation. we need to have a credible threat of military force.

the pentagon says the dead set that program back five to 10 years. we don't want to use military force. it has to be the instrument of last resort. we have to have a credible threat of military force. then we use sanctions in a smart way. we ratchet up the pressure. we do not hope for the good intentions of our adversaries across the negotiating table. we leverage that coercion to get the best possible deal. in the case of iraq, sanctions were working. we did not need to go to war. in north korea we gave them their money back. we undercut our financial sanctions and the north koreans are about to test a fourth nuclear weapon.

guest: i haven't heard the five to 10 setback. i have heard the two. we can talk about that later. there is no question that reducing our military spending. we are reducing the growth. we still spend more than what the next 14 countries in the world spend the put together. we are not disarming. trust but verify is a bottom line for any negotiation. i don't think we are going to depend on the good intentions of the iranians. host: how are sanctions better than wars? aren't they a form of war or an act of war? guest: they are a form of coercion. innocent people get hurt by sanctions. i don't care where you are or

who the target is. i am from south africa. sanctions that were imposed on south africa in the 1980's affected black south africans disproportionately to white south africans. black south africans who were really impacted by international sanctions. most leaders supported sanctions. it was the best way to bring down this apartheid government. there is no doubt. there are consequences for sanctions. the other option may be force. host: nelson mandela said this a bank sanctions. it is only through disciplined mass action that our victory can be insured.

we call the international community campaign to isolate the apartheid regime. to lift sanctions now would run the risk of a boarding the process toward the complete eradication of apartheid area guest: bishop tutu has said this. they believe in the pressure that existed economically and symbolically. a country that was repressive but had leaders that were elected, the isolation and the shaming from the world had a huge impact on that. host: rick is joining us from nashville. did morning. caller: good morning.

i agree with both of you. there is no clear answer. i go back to the kennedy days. the united states all of a sudden had to take actions. we need to send 600 troops to the baltic states. israel will take care of iran. we need to impose sanctions. any nation that does business with russia, we cease to be any kind of trade with you. that will break them. guest: i think giving companies that choice is tricky. it is important to understand

that the treasury department is not to deal with the diplomatic challenge whether it be ukraine crimea, north korea, what have you. the idea is to protect the global economy. we have to remember that. we have to ensure that we don't lift financial system desk thanks is because we got a diplomatic deal with iran. we are sanctioning about russian banks. those banks are engaged in money laundering and terror financing. they represent a threat to the global financial system. we should not lift the sanctions

because we have a diplomatic resolution. we need to use targeted financial sanctions to but other financial institutions on call. host: good morning. caller: there is a lot of talk about ratcheting. the power of the wrench is important. we're are talking about 40,000 troops. you hear don't hurt the people.

you start to see a disparity in the ratcheting and the force. host: let me conclude on that point. couldn't has access to as much as $70 billion. post -- based on the foreign policy, what impact will this have on resident food and and the russian economy? guest: if we would continue what we are doing now, very little. there is an expectation that they will significantly increase sanctions and cut off their international banking. that would have a massive impact on them. it also have a massive impact on the european economy. that is was probably going to have to happen. guest: that is exactly right.

we are playing a long game with food and. an escalation campaign is exactly right on the sanctions. we need to continue to hit at his cronies. we to go after essential elements of the economy. we are in a strong position now. europeans can wean themselves off the bad rubles of the russian economy. they can put themselves in position for the long game where they can resist his advances. we have a powerful instrument. we can use it intelligently and not in isolation. let's not diminish our negotiating leverage because we are betting on inspection regime

. at the end of the day, these are hard men and they are negotiating to win. host: mark dubowitz and carla anne robbins, thank you to both of you for being with us. guest: thank you. host: the g-8 is now the g7. the president travels to belgium for the g7 summit. the president will have a meeting with envelope merkel -- angela merkel. also live on c-span radio. we will take a short break. he will turn our attention to the high school graduation rate. it is above 80% for the first time in american history.

what does all this mean? it is friday morning a. we will be back in a moment. ♪ >> c-span's newest book, a collection of interviews with some of the top storytellers. >> you are pressed into it. you are afraid of holding the gun. when we went to our first battle and thought and i shot somebody

and killed somebody, it does something to you. it is difficult in the beginning. as time went on, it became easier. it became normalized. if you normalize a situation you will die. >> one of 41 voices from 25 years of our book notes conversations. this is now available at your favorite bookseller. >> 5000 students entered this year's c-span video competition on the most important issue congress should consider this year. we talk to the top five winners about their documentaries. >> we decided this was going to be our topic when there was an article on fracking in the local newspaper. it was happening two miles from our house. now it is a local problem.

we were very passionate about the subject. it seemed obvious that's what our topic should be. >> food transcends everything. the fact that a lot of people don't know what is being done to our food supply just eat food regularly without knowing what is inside it, i found that concerning. that is why i chose the topic. >> there is more that you don't know. it is hard for the average person to know what is going on because they don't know what is going on. do you value your security over your privacy? >> hear more from the top student winners on c-span. >> washington journal continues. host: we are going to concentrate on the high school

graduation rate. jennifer depaoli is an advisor. what did you learn? guest: would put these reports at annually. we measure the graduation rate across states. for the first time ever, we are using a new rate call the adjusted rate. it is the gold standard. it measures events rather than just taking a measure of a cohort. 80% of the, it is an extreme positive. we are very happy about it. there are challenges. we want the nation to be at 90% at 2020. that is the goal.

to get there, there are a lot of factors. what is going to have to happen to get us to that 90% rate? including low income students, closing the gap between social education students and their general population peers. the big-city challenge, we still have challenges in urban areas. we want to make sure that all students are graduating. we went to accelerate graduation rates for young men of color. host: i first want to point out that there are three states in gray. guest: they are on waivers. they have issues with their data system. they are not currently reporting.

they do report the other graduation rate that we use which is the average freshman graduation rate. that is 81%. they are included in some ways. they're not reporting until next year. host: in your home state of pennsylvania these states in light green means what? guest: they are on pace to reach 90%. those are positives. those are states are we're seeing the things we want to see. host: new york? florida? guest: those are states we are concerned about.

we have to make progress between now and 2022 reach. they will have to move at a faster pace. new mexico, arizona? guest: they have the lowest graduation rates currently. they're going to have to make tremendous progress to get where they need to be. host: what needs to be done? guest: that is a good question. in nevada we are seeing gaps between special education students and their general education population peers. that is something about a is going to have to overcome. in other states, this report does not necessarily address what states are specifically doing or not doing. it does ask good questions as to how to the states that are falling behind,

why are they falling behind what needs to improve? host: to close the opportunity gap between low income and middle to high income students, to define the opportunity gap. guest: we are seeing students graduate at a higher rate than their low income peers. there is a 15 percentage point gap between low income and non-low income students. across states, it varies from one percent in indiana to 30 something percent in minnesota. host: you want to solve the big-city challenge. guest: urban areas have been home to our dropout factories. schools that have a 60%

retention power. these schools are not graduating a tremendous amount of students. it is a 50-50 opposition that attend those schools. urban areas have been the site of where a lot of these reforms of the targeted. there are a lot of challenges left in those areas. especially one of the biggest problems with that is we see a lot of -- new york city for example -- they educate a huge percentage of the new york state student population. if they don't raise their graduation rate in the city, the state is not going to be able to reach that 90% goal. host: you are focusing on students with disabilities. why is that such a big problem? guest: there are a couple of

issues with that. they are 13% of the national cohort. if we don't address that 13% if we leave them behind, we are going to have major issues. we see states that are doing really well. they are graduating a lot of students with disabilities. montana only has a three percent gap. those are very small. there is a 20% national average between students with disabilities in the general population. host: focus on california and minority students. guest: california is a massive state. they educate 14% of the graduation cohort.

they graduate 20% of low income students. we will not reach the 90% goal without california. like i talked about with low income, the data is not segregated by race and gender. we know that race for young men is below the national average. these things will have to be addressed. host: our guest is jennifer depaoli. she is a education advisor. the nation has received an 80% graduation rate. we thank you for being with us. we want to take your calls and comments.

do you have a sense of how many dropouts return to get a ged or high school diploma? guest: there is a two to three percent rate of the students. a lot of states measure five-year graduation rates and secure graduation rates and measure ged's. i don't have an exact figure on what that rate is. we know that there are more graduates than dropouts. there are others that are graduating through other methods another means.

host: matt is on the phone from honolulu. when did you drop out of high school? guest: i was lucky enough to use the hawaii job corps program. it is a federal program in hawaii. i was able to get a hike school the plum a -- program -- high school diploma. hawaii is a model for higher graduation rate. i believe the secretary of education did speak out and said that hawaii is a success story.

there is a greater rate than in the past. host: thank you. guest: hawaii is a model. they are doing extraordinarily well in terms of their graduation rate but also in terms of those gaps that i talked about. they are high on our list of bright spots. hawaii is fantastic. congratulations on going back and using those resources. that is one of the things that the report wants to hone in on. not only raising the situation rate, but how are we doing it and encouraging students to come back would have been disconnected from school. host: our guest has a phd from the ohio state university.

good morning. caller: i would to high school in the suburbs here. we had a year where we merged with a city school with our high school. we saw good results from that. have you been introduced to that idea? guest: integrating the suburban schools with the inner-city schools, we don't get into those specifics of the report. i know that has happened around the country in different areas with mixed results. i'm glad to hear there was success. it is going to have to be looked at. if we're going to have success the suburbs in these areas what

can be done to actually learned and is working in certain places? that needs to be addressed. host: you talk about these dropout factories and the there are 200 fewer dropout factory schools. most big cities still have a graduation rate in the 60's and several in the 50's. guest: we are seeing this dramatic decrease. dropout factories have decreased by half. it is a positive to see that. the majority of them are still in these urban areas. they are persistent. it there -- there has been targeted resources at these schools. the good news is in addition to

the decrease in actual schools, we are seeing a decrease in the number of students that are attending those schools. fewer students are attending the schools have such a poor record. host: the preparation is another thing. you want to make sure that the kids are college or career ready. how are we doing? guest: that is a good question. there is not a perfect measure of college and career readiness. that is something that we need to take from the report and say what can be done to make sure that the students are college and career ready. is there something out there that is measuring. does more were needed be done it? what does that mean? is going to take work from a lot of people coming together.

they have to determine what that means. host: is it worth the to have a graduation rate if those who graduate need to take remedial courses in college russian mark guest: that is a point we make in the report. we look at different places that have seen that issue. if you look at california, their state education system saw that happening. we are graduating the students, that they are coming into our state system unprepared. they undertook efforts to basically do more to repair -- hurray those students. when the got into the higher education system that they were prepared. they have had great results. host: joe is a high school graduate from indiana. caller: if the founders were listening they would be appalled to hear you fail to mention

ballot box ready. it is not enough to be handed diplomas. you get to be ready to cast your ballot on election day for somebody who will keep the country safe. we are talking about nuclear credibility, you are talking about saddam hussein. you've got to have some quality of in education as well is just the handed a diploma. brainwashed democrats will not stand up to kim jong-un they we need to stand up to saddam hussein. host: let me take part of this

point. are they ready when they go to college? guest: that is part of a we talk about in the report. it is not simply enough to graduate them. they have to be ready to go out into the world. one of my favorite parts is we talked more about what can be done to make sure the whole child is ready. we talk abut social and emotional learning and making sure it is not just academics. they have to have other skills are up put the ball in the real world. the tough thing now is what are the skills that are needed? how do schools teach them and measure them? he makes a good point. they need to be civic ready as well is to college ready. host: i want to go back to this

chart. we talked about dropout factories and the number has decreased over the last 10 years. guest: dropout factories are schools that have a promoting power of 60% or less. in the ninth grade it counts students. then they compare it each year. in the 12th grade level, how is it compared to that ninth grade level? is that would hundred percent accurate. it does give you a look at what is happening between that night grade year and 12th grade year. 60% or less are graduating. then what they started with in the ninth grade. host: why did you get involved in this issue?

guest: that is a good question. i have a background in education. it is important to be involved in know these things. it does not feed into the controversy that we see in education debates. it is very much a look at what is happening and learning from what is happening. if you look at these trend, it is a positive. there are very positive things going on. to me, this is kind in the direction that we need to be going in. when to look at what is going on and have an open debate about how we can get better and how we can bring as many people in. host: gloria is from oregon. caller: i got that a high school in 1965. host: did you go back?

caller: i got my ged when i was 23. i became a nurse for over 40 years. host: why did you drop out of high school? what impact did it have on you? caller: i was from a poor family. that wasn't why. the things i was learning was boring. sitting in school all day and then being sent home with homework, these kids don't learn how to do any kind of work at home because they are sitting there studying. the teachers -- if he teachers

are doing their job, nobody should do homework. they are doing schoolwork for 10 or 12 hours a day. it is not right. host: thank you for phoning in. guest: in 2006 we did a report called the silent epidemic. it put the graduation rate on the map. part of what students who were interviewed in the report said was they dropped out because they felt disconnected from school. they did not think a were learning in school what was going to help them succeed in life. that is a significant problem. we give examples of programs

that are trying to make sure that students are not disconnected. that they are getting the support that they need and get personalized learning. they have options besides sitting in a classroom for 10 or 11 hours a day. i can't speak to the homework issue. i know a lot of schools of cut back on the amount of homework. we don't address that. we need to keep kids engaged in school and keep them on the tractor graduation. host: if you are just fitting in, our focus is on high school graduation right. it reached 80%. our guest is with civic enterprises. you can read the entire report online. jennifer depaoli is a education advisor. guest: i do know that there is a

number one reason. this disconnection and not feeling like school is giving you the skills or things you need to succeed, there are other factors. there are early warning indicators. these indicators of attendance and behavior problems, they show us that starting in the sixth grade, a student has these indicators and i can show that they may be off track for graduation. they might be falling between the cracks. there are factors into student graduation. chronic illness or absenteeism. having to take care of family members. feeling the need to leave school to get a job.

i don't know the number one factor is. all those things play into if a student stays in school. host: you can join in on the conversation. i grew up in poverty in brazil. the only thing that improves my life was education. good morning. caller: i'm calling about the curriculum in high school. i went to cardinal hayes high school in york city. i was punished for critically thinking and analytically thinking. i had a creative mind. they would suspend me for acting -- asking nonconformist questions. i could identify that early and i was cast away because of it.

pop culture is being ignorant in high school. is there an attempt at putting transcendental subjects in school? these kids are going to be able to go out and ask for a job. there are no jobs for these people. we need to explain the objective of pop culture. guest: i wish i had a great answer that. we don't look at that in our report what schools are teaching. what are the schools are held to certain standards. there are reasons why curriculum gets chosen. we do want students to be critical thinkers. we want students to be able to

leave and be ready for college careers, like i said earlier. being a citizen and critically questioning things is important. i can't speak directly to his high school. he made a point about discipline , one of the things we do talk about is the issue of discipline. making sure that it is fair. we don't want that to be a crutch. we know that leads to dropouts and things like that. i'm glad he stayed on the right path and graduated from high school and college. we do not go into the specifics of curriculum. host: the full report is available online. this is from dd.

guest: that is a very good question. we discussed this a little bit. the importance of errant and family engagement. when a child has active parents and family in their education there are fewer behavior problems. there are fewer attendance issues. they're more likely to graduate from high school and go to college. it is a huge factor. it is something that the schooldays to take into consideration when they are looking at things that can help get students on track to graduate. host: jimmy is joining us from texas. good morning. caller: good morning. my comment is if they would have intelligent people run the schools instead of educated people they would have better

schools. guest: i can't speak to the intelligence versus educated debate. i think there are smart people that are in schools right now and are trying to make the decisions to better educate all kids. host: this tweet goes to the numbers. we have had the debate about leave no child behind and the common core program. people argue that we are teaching kids to take a test. guest: there is some validity to that debate. we don't dive into that. there is an issue about what our students are really learning. i will say this. we have raised the standards in the past decade. we have made sure that there are

to just diploma mills that are handing out visas of paper. that is them acceptable practice anymore. more work needs to be done. students need to be learning. this is something that we can learn from. host: our last call is from new york. caller: good morning. i would like this lady to understand that the two people who should be involved. if they were involved it would be a hell of a lot better. guest: i would rather not jump into that argument. i think there are a lot of

people that are doing really great work. there are some people doing phenomenal work and trying to make sure that all students regardless of their background are able to succeed in school and life. host: we heard from the president yesterday as he gave the teacher of the year award. he is one of the youngest recipients of the teacher of the year award. he makes teaching fun. as an educator, what are the keys to successfully teaching students? guest: that is a really good question. you always are this argument, is an art or science. it is both. students need to be engaged in their learning. we need to make sure that we are not just saying are the numbers

correct? are we graduating enough? are they enjoying their education? students do well when they feel like they are involved in what they are learning and can be hands-on. teachers are enjoying themselves as well. i felt like my students learned the most when we were all actively engaged in learning. that is very important. we need to be sure that we are heading in that direction. we need to reach our 90% goal. we will not reach it if students are not engaged. we feel very hopeful to moment. we are on pace. we think that the fact that people are aware of this now and that people are paying attention to it and are targeting these reforms, we feel good that this

is something that can be achieved. host: jennifer depaoli is with civic enterprises. thank you for being with us. host: the president is meeting with german chancellor angela merkel. in about one hour 40 minutes we will have live coverage of a joint news conference with the president and german chancellor. the nsa spying tactics, the situation in benghazi, and the ukraine and eastern europe, dominate the conference. live on c-span and c-span radio at 11:40 a.m. live coverage of the white house correspondents dinner tomorrow getting underway at 6:00 eastern time. you can join the conversation on our facebook page as well as the president pokes fun at the media. you will also be able to see the red carpet as